Pre-setting Stances for Students During Collaborative Argumentation: Parallel Thinking Versus Adversarial Thinking

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuanyang Yang ◽  
Guoqing Zhao ◽  
Xiaomei Yan ◽  
Qing Chao ◽  
Xiaoyu Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Collaborative Argumentation

scholarly journals The limitations of conducting collaborative argumentation when teaching argumentative essays in Malaysian secondary schools

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 1111-1122
Author(s):  
Aireen Aina Bahari ◽  
Haddi Junaidi Kussin ◽  
Raja Nor Safinas Raja Harun ◽  
Misrah Mohamed ◽  
Norfaizah Abdul Jobar
Keyword(s):  
Secondary Schools ◽  
Time Pressure ◽  
First Language ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Class Discussion ◽  
Esl Teachers ◽  
Essay Writing ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Collaborative Argumentation ◽  
Argumentative Essays

The writing of argumentative essays promotes higher-order thinking skills amongst students regardless of their level of studying only when it involves collaborative argumentation. Hence, argumentation researchers recommend that teachers use group argumentation to teach argumentative essays since Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory believed that group argumentation improves students’ writing skills. The study’s objective is to explore the use of group argumentation during the teaching of argumentative essays in English as a Second Language (ESL) classrooms in Malaysia. Hence, the involvement of practitioners is significant so that the full extent of the problem is known rather than being interpreted solely by researchers. This qualitative study was conducted on nine ESL teachers through convenience sampling. Data was collected through online interviews and analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings demonstrated that ESL teachers did not practice group argumentation when teaching argumentative essays. They resorted to the whole-class discussion instead. Five factors contribute to the negligence of group argumentation in ESL classrooms, that is, time, pressure to deliver curriculum, students’ attitude, students’ speaking skills, and the use of the first language (L1). The findings indicated that it is necessary to promote the teaching of argumentative essay writing using group argumentation as one of the teaching approaches in secondary schools to ensure students reap the benefits of collaborative learning to improve their argumentation skills.

scholarly journals The Effects of Linguistic Qualifiers and Intensifiers on Group Interaction and Performance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan C. Jeong
Keyword(s):  
Interaction Analysis ◽  
Computer Mediated Communication ◽  
Group Interaction ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Interaction Patterns ◽  
Computer Supported Collaborative Learning ◽  
Mediated Communication ◽  
Collaborative Argumentation ◽  
Analysis Computer ◽  
And Performance

<P>This study tested the effects of linguistic qualifiers and intensifiers on the number and types of replies elicited per argument and per challenge posted in online debates. To facilitate collaborative argumentation, thirty-two students (22 females, 10 males) enrolled in a graduate-level online course classified and labeled their messages as arguments, challenges, supporting evidence, or explanations prior to posting each message. The findings showed that qualified arguments elicited 41 percent fewer replies (effect size = -.64), and the reduction in replies was greatest when qualified arguments were presented by females than males. Challenges without qualifiers, however, did not elicit more replies than challenges with qualifiers. These findings suggest that qualifiers were used to hedge arguments, and such behaviors should be discouraged during initial stages of identifying arguments (more so in all-female than in all-male groups) in order to elicit more diverse and more opposing viewpoints needed to thoroughly and critically analyze arguments. <BR></P> <P><STRONG>Keywords:</STRONG> Computer-mediated communication, CMC, communication style, group interaction patterns, interaction analysis, computer-supported collaborative learning, CSCL, collaborative argumentation.</P>

Collaborative Argumentation in Learning Resource Evaluation

2011 ◽  
pp. 574-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C Nesbit ◽  
Tracey L. Leacock
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
Instructional Designers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Learning Resources ◽  
Development Method ◽  
Quality Ratings ◽  
Collaborative Argumentation ◽  
Design Projects ◽  
Evaluation Of Learning ◽  
Collaborative Evaluation

The Learning Object Review Instrument (LORI) is an evaluation framework designed to support collaborative critique of multimedia learning resources. In this chapter, the interactions among reviewers using LORI are framed as a form of collaborative argumentation. Research on collaborative evaluation of learning resources has found that reviewers’ quality ratings tend to converge as a result of their interactions. Also, novice instructional designers have reported that collaborative evaluation is valuable preparation for undertaking resource design projects. The authors reason that collaborative evaluation is effective as a professional development method to the degree that it sustains argumentation about the application of evidence-based design principles.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document